POVERTY, INEQUALITY AND PUBLIC POLICY
SOCIAL WORK 876 POLITICAL SCIENCE 876
FALL 2011
Professor Mary Corcoran
5223 Weill Hall 764-9517
Office Hours: Tuesday 1:15-3:15
Other times by appointment
Website: http://www.ctools.umich.edu
Professor Laura Lein
4712 School of Social Work
Office Hours: by appointment
Email: leinl@umich.edu
Phone: 734-764-5347
This seminar will examine the nature and extent of poverty in the U.S., its causes and
consequences, and the antipoverty effects of existing and proposed government programs and
policies. It will examine competing theories of poverty and a range of approaches to research on
poverty. The types of questions to be addressed include the following:
What is poverty? Why is poverty so persistent? Why are poverty rates for minorities so high?
Is there a culture of poverty? What are the interrelationships among poverty, family structure,
inner city neighborhoods, education, labor market conditions, and public policies? Is poverty
passed on from generation to generation? What theories drive research and policy about
poverty? What are the implications of different approaches to studying poverty?
The course is divided into eight topics that will move us from more general issues to questions
about more specific groups and trends.
SHORT PAPER REQUIREMENT
There are eight topic areas over 14 weeks. Students are required to write six short (2-4 typed
pages) papers from among these eight topic areas. Each paper should cover a single week’s
required readings. One paper must be on Topic 2 “Poverty Theories” and must review and
assess the model of the underclass Wilson outlines in his book, When Work Disappears. One
paper must be on Topic 4 “The Underground Economy” and address Venkatesh’s portrayal of
the urban poor, in contrast to Wilson’s. One paper must address Topic 5 “Prisons and Work” and
examine Western’s Punishment and Inequality in America. Papers are due on the days readings
are required. No late papers will be accepted.
Many topic areas cover several issues, and students are asked to pick one issue to write on. For
example, Topic 1 includes readings on several issues. If you wish to write on more than one
issue–i.e., if you wish to do two separate papers on one topic’s set of readings, this is
permissible. The second paper can count toward your total of six papers. The second paper can
be turned in one week later than the first paper. These short papers must be informed by the
required readings.
RESEARCH PROPOSAL REQUIREMENT
The main requirement for this course is a proposal which reviews the literature and proposes a
research study on a poverty-related topic. Students considering writing their third-year papers,
prelim papers, or thesis in this area should use this proposal to explore a possible topic. Your
goal is to design a proposal for a publishable paper. Thirty percent of your grade will be based
on this proposal. The schedule for this proposal is as follows:
TOMORROW: Start thinking about possible topics. This can be the hardest part of your
proposal. Make a list of 2 or 3 possibilities, discuss them with relevant faculty, make an
appointment to see Professor Corcoran or Professor Lein if that would help, and do some
background reading on each topic so you have some idea of what has been done. Don’t settle
on a topic until you have done some reading, have a question that research could help
answer, and have some idea about how (what evidence) you might go about answering it.
October 4: Email Professor Corcoran and Professor Lein a brief description of your proposed
topic and research question. Hand in a hard copy version in class.
October 10-14: Make an appointment with Professor Corcoran or Professor Lein to discuss the
topic.
November 8: Submit a revised research question, and a 5-15 page literature view of research in
the area. This review should include a brief discussion of how answering your question will add
to what is already known and a brief outline of kinds of evidence you will use to answer the
question. Hand in a hard copy in class and email us an electronic copy.
December 6: Submit a 10-20 page proposal that includes: (1) a brief statement of problem, (2) a
literature review showing how you will add to past research, (3) a brief explanation of the
relationship of your work to current theories of poverty, and (4) a research plan. For example, if
results of past studies disagree, you should suggest possible reasons for these discrepant results
and show how your analysis might resolve this controversy
DISCUSSION REQUIREMENTS (ALL STUDENTS):
This is a seminar, and all students are expected to arrive on time, to have read the assigned
articles prior to the session in which they will be discussed, to attend class regularly, and to
participate in class discussion. Students should be prepared to talk on the discussion questions at
the end of each topic area. Each student will be asked in class to summarize a week’s readings
and to critique particular readings at least once. If students do not attend class regularly, their
grades will automatically drop one-third of a letter grade. Thus, a B+ would become a B.
Laptop Policy: No laptops allowed in class.
Grading: Grades will be based on the short papers (60 percent), class discussion (10 percent)
and the final project (30 percent).
Grading of Class Participation: Listening is as important as speaking in class participation.
Regular class attendance is necessary to achieve full credit for class participation. Each student
will be asked to summarize a required reading once during the term and to criticize a required
reading at least once during the term. Students who are more comfortable listening than talking
can receive full credit for class participation.
2
Readings
Required readings are marked with an *. All required readings on a topic area should have been
read on the day lectures on that topic begin. Most required papers/articles are available from the
web. Required articles not available on the web have either been put on reserve in the 3120
Weill Hall, or in the online course pack at: http://www.ctools.umich.edu
Six paperback books are required for the course:
K.Edin and M. Kefalas. 2005. Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put
Motherhood Before Marriage. Berkeley: University of California Press
K. Newman. 1999. No Shame in My Game. New York: Russell Sage.
C. Stack. 1974. All Our Kin. Harper.
S.A. Venkatesh. 2006. Off The Books: The Underground Economy of the Urban
Poor. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
B. Western. 2006. Punishment and Inequality in America. New York: Russell Sage.
W. J. Wilson. 2009. More Than Just Race. New York: Norton.
Interesting Web Sites
Administration for Children and Families:_________________ http://www.acf.dhhs.gov
Asst. Secy. of HHS for Planning and Eval.: ________________ http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov
Brookings Institute: ________________________________ http://www.Brookings.edu
Census Bureau: ______________________________________ http://www.census.gov
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: _____________________ http://www.cbpp.org
Center for Law and Social Policy: __________________________ http://www.clasp.org
Children’s Defense Fund: ______________________ http://www.childrensdefense.org
Future of Children _____________________________http://www.futureofchildren.com
Heritage Foundation: _________________________________ http://www.heritage.org
Institute for Research on Poverty: ____________________ http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/irp
Joint Center for Poverty Research ___________________________ http://www.jcpr.org
Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation: ______________ http://www.mdrc.org
Michigan Program on Poverty and Social Welfare Policy:
__________________________________http://www.ssw.umich.edu/poverty/pubs.html
National Poverty Center:______________________________http://www.npc.umich.edu
Urban Institute: _______________________________________ http://www.urban.org
Welfare Information Network: _______________________http://www.welfareinfo.org
PEW Research Center___________________________________http://people-press.org
3
TOPIC 1. THE MEASURE OF POVERTY, SHORT-RUN VS. LONG-RUN POVERTY, WHO IS POOR,
TRENDS IN POVERTY AND INEQUALITY, AND TRENDS IN WAGES AND EMPLOYMENT
(SEPTEMBER 6, 13, 20 AND 27)
Part I. Concepts and Measures of Poverty (Sept. 6)
Definitions of poverty/economic disadvantage embody assumptions about what is necessary
to insure full participation in a society. These assumptions guide the design of public
policies—tax policies, education policies, labor policies, anti-poverty policies. Measures of
poverty are used to set criteria for program eligibility (e.g., Food Stamps) and to monitor the
effectiveness of anti-poverty interventions. The U.S. measure of poverty is an absolute
measure based on family size that is updated annually for inflation. Europeans have a
broader conception of economic disadvantage which encompasses social exclusion on
multiple dimensions. When analysts compare poverty rates across countries they typically
use a relative income-based measure of poverty—e.g., incomes less than half the national
median income. Measures of poverty also reflect beliefs about why people are poor and the
ramifications of poverty.
* R. Blank and M. Greenberg. 2008.“Improving the Measurement of Poverty,” Brooking
Institution, Hamilton Project.
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2008/12_poverty_measurement_blank
/12_poverty_measurement_blank.pdf
* R. Haveman. Changing Poverty, Changing Policies. Ch. 14, “What Does it Mean to be
Poor in a Rich Society?”
U.S. Census Bureau. 2009. Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage, Current
Population Reports (Washington, DC), available from:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p60-238.pdf
Part II: Living Wages (Sept. 13)
Over the last two decades, there has been considerable debate over the nature of a living
wage, its relationship to the poverty line, and what counts as material hardship. The concept
of a “living wage” has been debated and has motivated political action.
* J. L. Romich, J. Simmelink & S. D. Holt. 2007. When working harder does not pay:
Low-income working families, tax liabilities, and benefit reductions. Families in Society
88(3): 418- 426.
I. Martin. 2001. Dawn of the Living Wage: The Diffusion of a Redistirbutive Municipal
Policy. Urban Affairs Review vol. 36 no. 4 470-496. (Ctools)
* S. Danziger, M. Corcoran, S. Danziger & C. Heflin (2000). Work, income, and material hardship after welfare reform. The Journal of Consumer Affairs 34(1): 6.
http://universallivingwage.org/
4
Part III: A Rising Tide No Longer Lifts all Boats: Trends in Economic Growth, Economic Inequality, Poverty, and the Great Recession (Sept. 20 and Sept. 27)
In the Post-War Boom, a rising tide lifted all boats. From 1949-1972, real incomes doubled
for all income groups; income inequality narrowed a bit; and poverty rates dropped. Since the
1980’s, the benefits of economic growth are not equally shared; income inequality has
grown; and the poverty rate has remained above its 1973 low point. In the Great Recession,
poverty rates rose sharply, and unemployment rates dropped sharply for unskilled workers.
In the late 1990s welfare reform was instituted and family trajectories of welfare use
changed. There is little evidence, however, of any long-term change in poverty rates or in
access to long-term employment.
S.H. Danziger. (2007). “Fighting Poverty Revisited: What Did Researchers Know 40
Years Ago? What Do We Know Today?”, Focus, 25(1): 3-11,
http://www.irp.wisc.edu.proxy.lib.umich.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc251a.pdf
*I.V. Sawhill and E. Monea. 2010. An Update to “Simulating the Effect of the Great Re
cession on Poverty.” Brookings Institute.
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/0916_poverty_monea_sawhill.aspx
*Emmanuel Saez, 2010. “Striking it Richer: The Evolution of Top Incomes in the United
States (Update Using 2008 Preliminary Estimates.” http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/saezUStopincomes-2006prel.pdf
Center on Budgest and Policy Priorities. 2011. “Chart Book: The Legacy of the Great
Recession. http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3252
K.M. Engmann and H.J. Wall. 2001. “The Effects of Recessions Across Demographic
Groups.” Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review January/February, 2010: 1-25.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/10/01/Engemann.pdf
* L. Lein and D. Schexnayder. Life After Welfare. 2007. Austin: University of Texas
Press.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS – TOPIC 1
1. Can “a rising tide lift all boats?” Does economic growth always reduce poverty? Has the
relationship between growth and poverty changed in recent decades? (Danziger, Goldin
and Katz)
2. How is the Orshansky measure of poverty constructed? Discuss one, some, or all of the
following criticisms of the measure: taxes should be subtracted out; geographic areas
vary in living costs; work expenses should be included; the measure should be a relative
one; in-kind transfers should be included; it should be updated for changes in
consumption patterns; leisure time should be given some weight; out-of-pocket health
care expenditures should be included; position in the life cycle is important. How would
5
you design an improved measure? Would changing the poverty measure affect the
demographic profile of the poor? (Blank and Greenberg)
3. There is considerable disagreement over how one should appropriately measure poverty.
Two proposed alternatives include: (1) widening the concept to social exclusion and
using multiple indicators; or (2) keeping an absolute measure but changing what counts
as resources (income), how poverty thresholds (needs) are defined, and/or how inflation
is adjusted for. Discuss the pros and cons of using one of these alternatives rather then the
current poverty measure. (Haveman)
4. Social inclusiveness measures focus on the moral and ethical responsibility of
government while absolute measures focus on the economic safety net. Which method is
preferable? Explain your reasoning. (Haveman).
5. What is the relationship between welfare use and departures on the one hand, and poverty
on the other? (Lein and Schexnayder).
6. What evidence about the nature of poverty and its relationship to other factors is provided
by different research approaches? (Lein and Schexnayder).
TOPIC 2. POVERTY THEORIES (OCT. 4 AND 11)
All students must write a short paper which discusses and evaluates Wilson’s model.
Part I. Early Cultural Models (Oct. 4)
It has been argued that the poor (or a subgroup of the poor) differ from mainstream society in
some crucial psychological sense. The poor have a distinct, separate culture and this culture
keeps them mired in poverty. Further, this culture tends to perpetuate itself both within and
across generations.
* J. Patterson. America's Struggle Against Poverty, 1900-1985, Chapter 7.
M. Katz. The Undeserving Poor, Chapter 1.
* O. Lewis, “The Culture of Poverty”, Scientific American. October 1966, 215 (4), PP
19-25.
* C. Stack. All Our Kin. New York: Harper, 1974.
Presentation: Kerri Nicoll – Understanding Participation (and Nonparticipation) in Public
Anti-Poverty Programs.
Part II. Models of the Underclass–Wilson’s “Social Isolation Theory” (Oct. 11)
E. Anderson. “The Story of John Turner” Public Interest 1992. (strongly recommended)
(http://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/the-story-of-john-turner).
*W.J. Wilson, 2009 More Than Just Race.
6
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: TOPIC 2
1. How is the culture of poverty supported and not supported by evidence we have reviewed
this far?
2. Read, review and evaluate the model of inner city poverty outlined in Wilson’s book. Pay
particular attention to the roles played by job opportunities, work, black middle class
migration, industrial structure, community structure and organization, discrimination, and
culture. What does this model imply for poverty policy?
3. What is the role Wilson assigns to discrimination in his model? Are Wilson’s arguments
about discrimination well supported by his evidence and reasoning? Explain.
TOPIC 3. STREET CULTURE AND DECENT CULTURE, HAS WORK DISAPPEARED FROM THE
INNER CITY? WHO IS WORKING IN THE INNER-CITY? (OCT. 25 AND NOV. 1)
*E. Anderson, “The Story of John Turner,” Public Interest, 1992. (reread)
*Elijah Anderson. 1994. “The Code of the Streets.” The Atlantic Monthly. May 1994.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/race/streets.htm
*K. Newman, 1999. No Shame in My Game: The Working Poor in the Inner City. Chapters 1,3-6, Epilogue.
*J. DeParle. “Flipping Burgers.” N.Y. Times, 9/5/99.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/16/books/flippingburgers.html?pagewanted=1?pagewanted=1
*Alan Wolfe, “Mead Goes to Harlem.” The New Republic, May 10, 1999. (Ctools)
K. Newman. 2006. Chutes and Ladders, Ch 1, 3, pp 5-54, 84-116 (Ctools)
Presentation: Amanda Tillotson – Lessons Lost: Policy Agendas and the Iteration of Racial
Inequality
Suggested Readings for Presentation:
Lieberman, Robert (2002). “Ideas, Institutions and Political Order: Explaining Political
Change.” American Political Science Review 96:4, 697-713.
Schneider, Ann and Ingram, Helen (1993). “Social Construction of Target Populations:
Implications for Politics and Policy.” American Political Science Review 87:2, 332-347.
* Somers, Margaret and Block, Fred (2005). “From Poverty to Perversity: Ideas, Markets
and Institutions after 200 Years of Policy Debate.” American Sociological Review 70:2,
260-287.
7
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: TOPIC 3
1. How consistent are Anderson’s model of “street” and decent cultures and John Turner’s
story with Wilson’s model? Does Turner lack job skills and a work ethic? Can he negotiate with public officials – judges and patrol officers? Does he support his children? Is
Turner caught between the “street” and the “decent” cultures? Are Turner’s options limited by discrimination – either in his interactions with the courts or with colleagues at
work? Explain.
2. Discuss No Shame in My Game. Evaluate Wilson’s arguments about work in inner cities
in light of Newman’s data. How, if at all, might you change or expand Wilson’s model to
deal with the Newman findings?
3. Is Newman too “romantic” in her portrayals of Burger Barn workers?
4. How much upward mobility is there among low-wage workers? Evaluate Newman’s
(Chutes and Ladders) evidence on this issue. What, if any does Newman identity as key
paths to mobility?
TOPIC 4. THE UNDERGROUND ECONOMY (NOV. 8)
All students must write a short paper on Off the Books.
Residents in Venkatesh’s very poor inner-city neighborhood employ a variety of strategies –
both licit and illicit – to “get by”. There are distinct understandings about dispute resolution and
distinct reciprocal networks of support. But this support may come at a cost.
*S.A. Venkatesh. 2006. Off the Books: The Underground Economy of the Urban Poor.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: TOPIC 4
1. Wilson describes the inner-city poor as socially isolated. Is that true of the community
Venkatesh portrays? If yes, explain how Venkatesh’s evidence shows social isolation. If
no, explain how his evidence shows connections and networks.
2. Wilson describes the inner-city as disorganized and as having few social mechanisms.
Are Venkatesh’s portrayals of dispute settlement and grievance processes consistent with
Wilson’s model of “social isolation”?
3. One resident uses a “fish tank” metaphor. What was meant by this?
4. Describe patterns of connection, helping, and reciprocity in Venkatesh’s book. What are
the strengths of these? What are the weaknesses?
5. Residents develop a number of survival strategies. Describe. Do these strategies inhibit
individual mobility? If yes, how?
8
TOPIC 5. PRISONS AND WORK (NOV. 15 AND NOV. 22)
All students must write a short paper on Punishment and Inequality in America.
Starting in 1980, incarceration rates have soared in the U.S. In 2008, more than one in every 100
adults and one in every nine black men ages 20-34 were behind bars. The U.S. incarceration rate
in 1993 was 5 to 10 times higher than those in Western European countries and the black U.S.
incarceration rate was 20 times higher than European incarceration rates. Over 30 percent of
black men born in the late 1960’s who had a high school diploma or less had been incarcerated
by 1999.
*S. Raphael. 2007-2008. “The Employment Prospects of Ex-Offenders.” Focus Vol 25.
No. 2 Fall-Winter 2007-2008, pp 21-26
[http://www.urbaninstitute.org/UploadedPDF/410855_holzer.pdf]
*Bruce Western. 2006. Punishent and Inequality in America, Chapters 1, 4, and 5, pages
11-33, 85-130.
Kareem Fahim. 2009. “Seeking to Intervene with Young Adults Before Crime Becomes a
Way of Life.” The New York Times. March 4, 2009.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/nyregion/04offenders.html
NPR. Town Relies on Troubled Youth Prison for Profits.
http://www.npr.org/2011/03/25/134850972/town-relies-on-troubled-youth-prison-forprofits
NPR. Private Prison Promises Leave Texas Towns in Trouble.
http://www.npr.org/2011/03/28/134855801/private-prison-promises-leave-texas-townsin-trouble
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: TOPIC 5
1. How have incarceration rates changed? Which groups have been most affected by these
changes? How have these changes affected measured inequality? What factors does
Western (2006) cite as accounting for trends in incarceration?
2. What does Western mean when he says that the prison boom has led us to underestimate
racial inequalities in employment and earnings? Is his reasoning and evidence convincing? Why or why not?
3. What are the consequences of incarceration for men’s long-run employment and earnings? Discuss and assess Western’s and Raphael’s arguments and evidence on this issue.
4. What are the economic forces and political beliefs that have led to current incarceration
rates?
9
TOPIC 6. THE POLARIZATION OF JOB OPPORTUNITIES (NOV. 29)
Since the late 1980’s, employment growth has been concentrated in high-skill, high-wage jobs
and low-skill, low-wage jobs and middle skill jobs have been disappearing.
*D. Autor. 2010. “The Polarization of Job Opportunities in the U.S. Labor Market”
D. Autor. 2010. “U.S. Labor Market Challenges Over the Long Term.” (See http://econwww.mit.edu/faculty/dautor/policy to print out/read these papers.)
*C. Goldin and L.F. Katz. 2009. “The Future of Inequality: The Other Reason EducationMatters So Much.” (reread)
T.A. Sum et al. 2011. “No Country for Young Men in the United States.” (CTOOLS)
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: TOPIC 6
1. What four factors does Autor claim account for the polarization of job opportunities?
Which does he claim is most important? What evidence and reasoning does he offer to
support these claims? Are his evidence and reasoning persuasive? Why or why not?
2. Educational attainment has risen steadily in past decades. Yet Autor and Goldin & Katz
recommend increasing the number of college graduates. Why? Explain their reasoning
and evidence.
TOPIC 7. THE CONTENT AND STRUCTURE OF LOW WAGE WORK (DEC. 6)
For decades, the structure and protections around low wage work have changed to allow employers more flexibility in deploying workers and to control labor costs. These changes have
implications for the income and schedules for low-wage workers in particular.
* S. J. Lambert and J. R. Henly. 2005. Nonstandard work and child care needs of low
income parents. Work, Family, Health & Well-Being, ed. S. M. Bianchi, L. M. Casper,
and R. King.
S. J. Lambert and J. R. Henly. 2009. Scheduling in Hourly Jobs: Promising Practices for
the Twenty-First Century Economy.
http://www.mobilityagenda.org/home/file.axd?file=2009%2f5%2fscheduling.pdf
* Video: The Workers (http://mirlyn.lib.umich.edu/Record/005633064)
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: TOPIC 7
1. What aspects of work account for irregularities in workers’ income and family life?
What economic forces drive this reconfiguration of work?
2. In what respects do the conditions of day laborers resemble those of other non-standard
workers? What economic forces drive the structure of labor around day labor?
10
TOPIC 8. WHY DON’T LOW-INCOME WOMEN MARRY AND WHO WOULD THEY MARRY?
(DEC. 13)
Over an individual’s lifetime, his or her family alters constantly. Individuals leave home, marry,
separate, bear children, move in with relatives–each of these events can alter the family’s economic well-being...especially for women and children. Family structure is strongly related to
child poverty.
In 2006, 26.6 percent of all white non-Hispanic births were out-of wedlock, 49.9 percent of all
Hispanic births were out-of-wedlock and 70.7 percent of non-Hispanic African American births
were out of wedlock. Six out of ten long-term poor children live in single mother homes. Many
blame the growth in single parents as the cause of increased poverty, welfare dependence, crime
and drug use. Why don’t women postpone child-bearing until after they marry? Who are the fathers of their children?
*J.T. Patterson. 2010. “The Moynihan Future.” The New York Times, Op-ed, May 29,
2010, page A19. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/opinion/29Patterson.html?src=mv
* Edin, K and M. Kefalas. 2005. Promises I Can Keep. (Everyone should read this).
*L. Tach and K. Edin. 2011. “The Relationship Contexts of Young Disadvantaged Men.”
Annuals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, May 2011: 76-94.
(CTOOLS).
*K. Edin, L. Lein and T. Nelson. 2007. Taking Care of Business. In F. Munger, Laboring Below the Line. Russell Sage Foundation.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: TOPIC 8
1. Why do low income women put motherhood before marriage? Do you find Edin and
Kefalas’ analyses convincing? What are the implications of their findings for marriage
promotion policies?
2. Growing up poor is associated with economic hardships during childhood and has a strong
negative association with children’s economic life chances. One reason children are poor is
that their parents choose not to marry or to not stay married. Should the children bear the
costs of this decision or should society intervene? If society could intervene, how might it do
so? (DeLeire and Lopoo 2010, The Economist).
3. Who are the fathers of low-income children, and what interventions might count with them?
11